[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 134 (Wednesday, September 30, 1998)]
[Senate]
[Pages S11142-S11146]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                      UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY

  Mr. HAGEL. Mr. President, foreign policy to Nebraskans and many 
Americans is not theory or some abstraction suspended between 
university classrooms, State Department corridors, or congressional 
hearing rooms. Foreign policy is the framework policy for America's 
interests in the world--trade and commerce, national security, 
financial markets, international economics, coalitions and alliances, 
narcotics policy, technology, immigration, all part of foreign policy. 
Foreign policy is America's future. It represents the complete and 
integrated policy that affects every dynamic of American life. Foreign 
policy connects all other policies. The world is interconnected. And 
the one overarching policy process America has to engage the world is 
foreign policy.
  President Kennedy spoke of new frontiers in his 1961 inaugural 
address. He spoke of the long-term challenges in the long twilight 
struggle against communism. Today, just as in 1961, and throughout 
history, mankind has been presented with new sets of challenges and new 
frontiers. These new challenges dominate after every global 
transformation. President Bush's new book deals directly with our 
present-day world transformation-- ``A World Transformed''--and we 
recall President

[[Page S11143]]

Kennedy's words in that inaugural speech and apply them to the 
challenges of the 21st century.


                         Historical Perspective

  Today, as in 1961, America stands again at a crossroads, at a unique 
but not unprecedented time in history. We have witnessed other great 
global shifts at several points in the 20th century. In the early days 
of Teddy Roosevelt, we saw America emerge as a global power. After 
World War I, America retreated into a mindless isolationism as economic 
depression and tyranny spread throughout the world. In 1941, World War 
II again thrust America into a leading role in the world and made us 
again a dominant power. The rise of the Soviet Union ushered in the 
cold war with its deadly arms race, nuclear brinkmanship, and policies 
of containment enforced by American soldiers.
  For over 40 years, the world was divided between two powerful enemies 
capable of destroying each other and the world. During this period, 
hope, opportunity, and freedom were held captive in many nations to 
authoritarian rule. Hundreds of millions of people across the globe 
were victims of political slavery. And then in 1989 the Soviet empire 
crumbled as freedom broke through the Iron Curtain.
  In the decade of the 20th century, we have seen great changes as the 
world settles out from the cold war. We stand at the edge of a great 
precipice. The world is changing around us, under us, above us. The 
rate of change is phenomenal, almost incalculable, for both good and 
evil. This change unnerves us, it challenges us, and will dominate us 
unless we shape the change and lead the force of change for good in the 
world.
  History provides valuable lessons, but it holds no clear blueprint or 
roadmap for the future. The rise of technology and communications has 
connected the world in every way. Our economics are intertwined. Our 
economies are interconnected. Today we live in a global community 
anchored by global economies.
  We also face new threats. Unlike the past, these threats do not come 
from a single country or a single enemy or a single state; they are 
borderless threats. The scourge of terrorism brings with it the deadly 
threat of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The trafficking 
of illegal drugs respects neither boundaries nor borders nor 
governments. The confluence of economic and national security concerns 
has created mutual threats and mutual self-interests among all nations 
of the world.
  What do we do? Where does the United States go from here? After great 
global shifts, there is always a time of uncertainty and instability. 
There is no clearly lit path to follow. Different times call for new 
solutions to new challenges, borderless challenges.
  One thing is clear, Mr. President. The United States of America must 
lead the world in the 21st century. We are the only dominant power in 
the world today, which provides us with immense opportunity but yet 
awesome responsibility. America must lead. America must not be 
intimidated by the unprecedented rate of change and uncertainty in the 
world. The diffusion of new geopolitical, economic, and military power 
that will develop over the next few years will form the world's power 
structure well into the next century. Of this we can be certain: 
America must engage this natural development, welcome it, and lead it.
  Timidity is not America's heritage. Boldness inspires. As George Bush 
said, as he accepted the Republican nomination for President in 1988,

       One issue overwhelms all others and that's the issue of 
     peace. . . . One by one the unfree places fall, not to the 
     force of arms but to the force of an idea: freedom works. . . 
     . It's a watershed. It is no accident. It happened when we 
     acted on the ancient knowledge that strength and clarity 
     [strength and clarity] lead to peace; weakness and 
     ambivalence lead to war.


               Facing the Challenges of the 21st Century

  America's objectives in this new century must be to help build 
security, hope, and opportunity. The United States and all nations will 
prosper in the 21st century if we lead a world of more freedom, 
stronger democracies, and unlimited trade and investment. Such a world 
is in our national interests. It is in the mutual self-interests of all 
peoples.
  The next 2 years are especially critical.
  They will help set precedents for much of the early part of the 21st 
century. Events will occur in the next 2 years that will change the 
shape of the world.


       The Future of America in the Next 2 Years and Beyond 2000

  The future of America into the next century will be dominated by 
foreign policy. Because of our interconnected world, foreign policy is 
no longer just the practice of statecraft.
  The completeness of foreign policy will include a strong national 
defense first, and Senator McCain was very clear in his statement on 
that point. Second, the completeness of foreign policy will include a 
strong economy. And third, foreign policy will include clear, concise, 
comprehensive international policies--trade policies--all wrapped into 
a foreign policy.
  The two essential parts of a successful foreign policy in the 21st 
century will be, one, building consensus, building consensus both in 
the United States with the American people and internationally by 
working with coalitions of willing partners; and, two, projecting 
strong U.S. leadership in the world.


   Building Consensus through Alliances, Institutions and Coalitions

  In the next century, the United States must work to build 
international consensus through coalitions, alliances and institutions. 
The diffusion of power throughout the world will result in regional 
spheres of influence. In this structure and the challenges it presents, 
no one nation, no matter how powerful, can singlehandedly control the 
outcome.
  Borderless challenges will require borderless solutions. The United 
States will be most effective when we work with our allies and those 
willing to work with us. That does not mean weakening or compromising 
our national sovereignty. But we will be successful when we work with 
others to achieve our mutual goals. The coalition assembled by 
President Bush to drive Iraq from Kuwait was a good example of what we 
can accomplish when working in concert with those who share our aims--
all with mutual self-interests.
  As we approach the 21st century, America must evaluate its current 
partnerships and build new ones. We first need to review our current 
global commitments, alliances, coalitions and institutions. Many of 
these entities were created to address the challenges of a world that 
no longer exists.
  The nations that assembled at Bretton Woods in 1944 and created the 
IMF and World Bank faced a dramatically different economic system than 
we currently find today. The current debate that rages on and on and on 
over IMF funding and IMF reform is a timely example of this point.
  I agree, as does the IMF, that it needs reform, but what kind of 
reform? Not the reform of glancing blows and cheap political rhetoric 
and demagogic rhetoric for partisan gain. Today, we are struggling to 
define our world's financial and economic infrastructure and center of 
gravity, even while we swirl and swirl in its sea of changes. What 
should be the role of the G-7? Should it be revitalized? Is the G-7 
still relevant, especially since the introduction of the European 
Monetary Union?
  The United Nations was formed during the beginning of the cold war 
and has gone far beyond its original charter and objectives. What 
should be the role of the United Nations in the next century? How do we 
continue to fund it and at what amount? Is the United Nations 
overburdened with too many assignments and expectations? What about 
missile defense for the United States of America? Is the 1972 ABM 
Treaty with a nation once described by President Reagan as being 
``relegated to the dustbin of history'' still relevant? Does this 
treaty protect America from rogue nations with weapons of mass 
destruction? I don't think so.
  We need a debate on this issue. We need to take a clear-eyed, 
insightful and penetrating look at these institutions and 
relationships. We need to ask tough questions: Are they relevant to the 
challenges of the 21st century? Are their objectives still meaningful? 
Can they adapt to address new challenges?
  If we cannot answer these questions, then we need to change these 
institutions or create new ones to meet our

[[Page S11144]]

current global economic and security challenges. One of the relevant 
new organizations for the 21st century is the World Trade Organization. 
Created to provide a structure for determining global trade practices 
and settling trade disputes, the WTO is a good example of an 
organization born to deal with the new challenges of the new century.
  Regional alliances will play a greater role in a world unshackled 
from the restraints of the cold war. They will not be isolated blocs, 
but regions of mutual interest within an interconnected world. These 
coalitions will and do exist because of mutual economic and security 
interests and can play an important role in expanding security, growth 
and opportunity in the world. They can help build, encourage and 
support new democracies and market economies and ensure hope for all 
peoples.
  These are critical building blocks for the 21st century. As Hugh 
Sidey once wrote:

       Hope energizes . . . doubt destroys.

  Hope is fundamental to the human condition. Without it, desperation 
takes hold. We know desperate men do desperate things. War, conflict 
and poverty are the enemies of all peoples. America must pull back the 
curtain of the status quo and take a long, thoughtful look at the 
needs, problems and cultures of developing countries. If we would have 
taken more care and invested more thought and time in Vietnam, we may 
not have blundered into that tragic mistake.
  The building of new regional alliances will require finding common 
denominators of interests within a region. For example, the fate of the 
nations in the Caspian Sea region are linked to each other. No nation 
will prosper in that area of the world until they all prosper. Much of 
Europe has already determined that it is in their mutual self-interest 
to link their monetary and currency policies through the creation of a 
single currency, the Euro. The conflict in the Middle East will not be 
resolved until there is regional peace. Economic prosperity also awaits 
that peace.
  Regional alliances left over from the cold war also need to be 
reviewed. We have done this to some extent with NATO when we added 
three new members. But we need to step back and take a closer look at 
NATO and at the role NATO should play in a new century. What will be 
NATO's purpose? How far should NATO expand? Should it expand? What are 
the consequences, costs and benefits of continued expansion of NATO? 
Any further expansion must be based on a clearly defined role for NATO.
  In light of the current mass destruction and war in Kosovo of which 
Senator McCain spoke, and Bosnia before it, one must ask this question: 
Is NATO relevant since it is a European security organization? The 
slaughter in Kosovo goes on. Yet the world looks on while NATO and the 
United Nations stand by issuing empty ultimatums to Milosevic.
  One could legitimately ask, What is the mission of NATO in the United 
Nations? To stop the butchery in Kosovo? Or after a while stop it? Or 
talk about stopping it? Or what? How long will NATO troops stay in 
Bosnia, especially in light of the recent elections in Serbska where 
Mrs. Plavsic, the candidate of the west, was defeated by the 
nationalist, Mr. Poplasen?
  We are going to need to build new coalitions to address today's 
borderless challenges. These need not be former alliances or new 
multilateral institutions. The United States needs to address today's 
challenges with those nations willing and able to join us. Again, 
America must lead.
  Prime among those borderless challenges is navigating a global 
economy. The current world financial crisis is presenting the best 
minds around the globe with unparalleled challenges. In some ways, we 
face a situation similar to when Christopher Columbus set sail from the 
coast of Spain in the 15th century.
  At that time, back onshore, the debate raged on whether the Earth was 
flat or round. The answers were unknown. Only by sailing the 
unpredictable seas and safely reaching the new world was Columbus able 
to deliver an answer. We are currently navigating the most turbulent of 
economic waters. This storm of financial instability has left many of 
the world's economies reeling. As of yet, the full brunt of this storm 
has not yet reached American shores, but it is out there, and we do not 
know what path it will take. Will it engulf Brazil and sweep up through 
the Americas? We do not know. We do know that America alone cannot stem 
this tide. We will only find a way to calm this storm by working with 
the other nations of the world and by rethinking and restructuring 
international organizations like the IMF and the World Bank.
  Free, fair, open trade will be the engine of growth in the new 
century, as it has been for the last half of the 20th century. All 
nations must work to break down barriers that inhibit global commerce 
and trade. Only then will all the world prosper. We in the United 
States must do far more to educate our people and our leaders on this 
issue.
  I have concluded, Mr. President--and you and I have worked on this 
issue for over 2 years--I have concluded that economic ignorance 
favoring the short term over the long term and concentrations of 
selfish political and economic power are the main reasons why free, 
fair and open trade is not universally supported in the United States 
or in this Congress.
  We must also stand up against protectionists at home and abroad who 
would take the world back to the disastrous days of the 1930s. We must 
not underestimate this threat, especially in light of last week's 
defeat of fast track in the House of Representatives. Economic 
isolation is impossible if for no other reason than the world Internet 
revolution.
  Terrorism and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction pose 
the greatest dangers and threats to global security in the 21st 
century. No nation will be immune and no one nation can fight these 
enemies alone. The trafficking of illegal drugs also threatens security 
and hope around the world. Those engaging in these despicable acts must 
be made the pariahs of the civilized world, stopped at every turn and 
dealt with harshly. But we need coalitions built on mutual self-
interest to deal with these scourges.


                       Projecting U.S. Leadership

  While we must work with the other nations of the world, there can be 
no leadership by committee. We currently have a vacuum of leadership in 
the world. History has taught us that the world is most dangerous and 
unpredictable when there are vacuums of global leadership.
  Leaders and nations lead through the force of confidence, character, 
honesty and trust. Our leadership must be based on credibility. The 
word of the United States should be the strongest of currencies in 
international relations. The nations of the world must trust our word 
and trust our commitment. We must remember the words of Teddy Roosevelt 
who once said, ``The one indispensable requisite for both a nation and 
an individual is character.'' This gives America the moral authority to 
lead, not the religious authority, not the holy authority, but the 
moral authority to lead.
  Our allies must respect us and our adversaries must fear us. Rhetoric 
without actions will result in failure and will encourage dictators and 
world instability. Today, again as Senator McCain mentioned minutes 
ago, Iraq and North Korea are directly and openly challenging the 
civilized world. The United States must have a clearly defined American 
foreign policy that is backed with the might of the U.S. military. 
Genuine leadership is more than crisis management. The ability to lead 
rests on others knowing where you stand.
  The guarantor of a nation's foreign policy is its national defense. A 
nation's word is only as strong as the military and the will that 
stands behind it. The United States must make strengthening our 
military one of its most immediate top priorities. Without a strong 
military, our threats are hollow.


             The Role Of Congress In Shaping Foreign Policy

  The role of Congress in helping shape American foreign policy must be 
greater as we move into the 21st century. America cannot lead the world 
without the support of the American people. Foreign policy and 
everything it encompasses must be relevant--must be relevant--to the 
daily lives of the American people. Responsibility for

[[Page S11145]]

making foreign policy relevant ultimately rests with the President and 
his foreign policy team. However, the Congress must be part of the 
development of foreign policy--setting objectives and priorities, 
providing oversight and advice, allocating resources and helping set 
strategic direction. Congress should be a full partner with the 
President in foreign policy. The Congress cannot implement or execute 
foreign policy, nor should it try. That is the President's job.
  Foreign policy should be bipartisan. America's leaders need to speak 
with one voice to the world. We may debate the best course in this 
Congress, in committee, as we should, but there is no room for partisan 
politics and partisan gain in doing what is right in this Nation in the 
international arena. The Truman-Vandenberg relationship is a good 
model.
  Engaging the American people is just one aspect of a greater role for 
Congress in shaping foreign policy. To craft policies that will allow 
America to engage in and lead the world, Members of Congress will need 
to acknowledge and understand the completeness of foreign policy, the 
interconnects of foreign policy.
  What can Congress do? Over the next 2 years I propose--and I will be 
proposing this to the bipartisan leadership of this Congress--that the 
106th Congress, which will assemble in January of next year, start 
holding oversight hearings on every facet of America's foreign policy. 
Congress should encourage new ideas and new solutions from our best 
foreign policy thinkers during these hearings. The Foreign Relations 
Committee in the Senate and the International Relations Committee in 
the House should coordinate at these hearings, under the direction of 
the bipartisan leadership of Congress, and review every multilateral 
relationship the United States has, every institution, alliance and 
coalition, review the mission, the organization, the relevancy, the 
cost, the benefits.

  In many instances, there should be joint hearings with committees, 
such as Armed Services and Foreign Relations, Banking and Foreign 
Relations, Finance and Foreign Relations, and other combinations of 
committees. The results of these hearings should be summarized and sent 
to the President and his foreign policy team, every Member of Congress, 
the President's Cabinet, and be made available to the American people. 
The results of these hearings will help formulate America's foreign 
policy for the next century.
  In the next 2 years, Congress must develop a comprehensive trade 
policy and pass much-needed trade reform legislation. Our trade policy 
needs an overhaul to meet the challenges of a global economy, 
especially our sanctions policy.
  Sanctions are a legitimate foreign policy tool but they are not a 
substitute for foreign policy. Unilateral sanctions do not work in an 
interconnected world. The imposition of sanctions fails to take into 
account the long-term consequences for America and ties the President's 
hands, giving him no flexibility to react to the unique international 
situations which may require delicate diplomacy, diplomatic 
maneuvering, or decisive, tough, strong action.
  Approving fast-track authority should be part of this trade package. 
Congress should make maximum use of blue-ribbon commissions like the 
Rumsfeld Commission on missile defense and the Kassebaum-Baker 
Commission on gender-integrated training in our Armed Forces.
  America wastes a tremendous amount of talent and experience when we 
do not use our former highly respected members of Government and 
Congress to help us solve our complicated and interconnected challenges 
and problems. This will all stimulate and frame a national debate on 
critically important issues that will help inform and educate America 
on the great challenges, the important, the vital challenges of our 
time. Foreign relations--and all that it encompasses--must not be held 
hostage to politics or partisan gain. It will not work any other way in 
this interconnected world of short-term and long-term danger.


                               Conclusion

  When history records the world, and this time in the world, and the 
world's move from the 20th to the 21st century, will it show that 
America and the world squandered a most precious opportunity and unique 
time in the history of man? Will it record an era of ``inter-cold war'' 
after 40 years of cold war? A time of world anarchy and growing 
disorder? A period when the world, in fact, went backwards and allowed 
the progress of the last 50 years to erode? Will it lament 
opportunities not taken, and are thus forever lost?
  The answers will be determined by the role the United States plays in 
the world during the next few years. We do have choices. But the 
choices we make first must be based on the values and the ideals of a 
just nation. Our foreign policy must be in our national interest--
clearly defined, driven by priorities, objectives, and implemented with 
focused strategies. A random conduct of foreign policy will not do. The 
President and the Congress must forge a strong bipartisan partnership 
underpinned by a strong congressional bipartisan effort.
  This Congress must use the next 2 years to help prepare America and 
the world for this new dynamic competitive center. America must be 
nimble in putting together a coalition of countries allied around the 
common interests of civilized people. We must be smart in how we 
multiply our power and interest around the world.
  The United States must be careful not to overload multilateral 
institutions like the United Nations and the IMF. They are equipped to 
do only so much. When their circuits are overloaded, they will fail, 
and fail dramatically, thus causing great uncertainty, leaving deep and 
wide vacuums of confidence in the world. The next 2 years are going to 
be difficult years for the United States. They may be dangerous years, 
as well. The President of the United States is wounded. He is, maybe, 
fatally wound. This will affect his international standing and 
leadership. This is of his own doing. America must pull together to 
present to the world a unified nation with respect to our global 
leadership responsibilities. We must do this so that we will continue 
to gain the confidence of the world that gives us the credibility to 
continue to lead the world. The Congress will be called upon for 
greater international leadership. It must be prepared for this role.

  For all our flaws and imperfections, the world looks to America for 
leadership because the world trusts us because of our people. Americans 
are innately fair and decent people with a wonderful abundance of 
common sense. Our system of government allows the fairness and decency 
of the American culture to dominate all aspects of our way of life. It 
allows the best of our people and our culture to soar high. Yes, we are 
sometimes misguided, heavy-handed and even arrogant. But we have this 
intangible ``self-correction'' process built deep into our national 
psyche. We can and often do ``self-correct''--both personally and 
nationally. Which the world sees, trusts, and admires.
  It is within our grasp to help shape a world that has the potential 
to do more good for more people than man has ever known. This is an 
awesome responsibility but one that America is up to if America does 
what it always does best--work together. At the end, when the curtain 
comes down, and we are held accountable, all that really matters is 
what this century's greatest leader, Winston Churchill, once said:

       What is the use of living, if it be not to strive for noble 
     causes, and to make this muddled world a better place for 
     those who will live in it after we are gone?

  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Inhofe). Under a previous order, there 
will now be 25 minutes under the control of the Senator from Kansas, 
Mr. Roberts.
  Mr. ROBERTS. Mr. President, first, I commend my good friend and 
colleague from Nebraska for providing the Senate and all of our 
colleagues and all who have listened, and I hope, the Nation's press 
and the international press, a comprehensive statement with regard to 
foreign policy. We have many Senators who certainly have expertise in 
this field, but I know of no one in the Senate who has given a more 
articulate overview of what America faces in our role to the world than 
Senator Hagel.

[[Page S11146]]

  Senator Hagel and I have been extremely concerned about the trade 
policy of the United States, not only in regard to the administration, 
but in regard to this Congress. In Nebraska and Kansas, States we are 
privileged to represent, our livelihood, our very livelihood, depends 
on progressive, consistent trade policy. We both know and we both have 
talked for almost a year now about the Asian flu, the global contagion, 
and how that has impacted especially agriculture--our Kansas farmers 
and our Nebraska farmers--but everybody that depends on trade.
  We have been very concerned about the lack of funding for IMF and 
normal trading status for China, fast-track legislation--which, I must 
say, the withdrawal of fast track and now the defeat of fast track in 
the House is a terrible blow; it is like shattered glass, if you will. 
It is like an embargo. I think we are going to pay enormous penalties 
for that. And then sanction reform, as the Senator mentioned. Until we 
get our act together, until we get a consistent and positive policy in 
regard to trade, I am afraid we will go through some very, very 
difficult times.
  The Senator from Nebraska has seized the issue. He has given a very 
comprehensive view. I want to thank him for it. I hope that many pay 
attention. I look forward to working with the Senator in this regard.

                          ____________________